Planning Commission Minutes 10/25/2016
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER 25, 2016
MINUTES FROM REGULAR MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman William Rice opened the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission at 7:01 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room at the Town Offices. Also present were Jamie Rabbit, Director of Planning and Community Development; Michael Glidden, Assistant Town Planner; Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk; and other interested parties.
Chairman Rice thanked SCTV for filming this meeting.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
Chairman Rice led attendees in the Pledge of Allegiance.
II. ROLL CALL
1. Appointment of Alternates
Commission members in attendance were: William Rice, Gary Lungarini, Holly Beum, Alan Needham, Robert Kulakowski, Ron Locandro, Jr., Erin Leavitt-Smith, and Elizabeth Burt.
1. Appointment of Alternates
A full Commission was present providing a quorum; no alternates were appointed.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the September 27, 2016 Regular Meeting
Commissioner Locandro made a motion to accept the September 27, 2016 Minutes, as recorded.
Commissioner Needham seconded the motion, and it was passed with Commissioner Kulakowski abstaining.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
1. Public Hearings
a. Application #16-02 of Mansour Prime Properties, LLC, Agent; Royce Palmer, Owner; for a 19-lot affordable housing subdivision under CGS 8-30g on the property located at 80 Climax Road (Assessor’s Map D2, Bock 608, Lot 001). Zone R-40. (received 09/01/2016; public hearing must be opened by 11/05/2016)
Chairman Rice noted receipt of correspondence from the Applicant asking for a postponement of opening the Public Hearing because they need additional time to address Staff comments, and they also made an error in not notifying the abutting property owners. With the Commission’s agreement, he indicated that the opening of the Public Hearing would be postponed until the 11/22/2016 regularly scheduled meeting at the Town Hall; therefore, no public comment will be received at this meeting. Mr. Rabbitt clarified that in the Applicant’s letter requesting postponement of the Public Hearing, they also included an extension of time to open the Public Hearing beyond the 65-days required by State statute. Chairman Rice summarized the Application was received 09/01/2016 and the Commission has 65 days to open the Public Hearing, unless the Applicant grants an extension to that period of time, which they have done; and the next meeting will be in 4 weeks.
b. Application #16-03 of Denno Land Surveying, Agent; Alice M. Yokabaskas, Owner; for a 2-lot re-subdivision on the property located at 224 Old Farms Road (Assessor’s Map C05, Block 301, Lot 008A). Zone R-80. (received 09/13/2016; public hearing must be opened by 11/17/2016)
Chairman Rice opened the Public Hearing for Application #16-03.
Brian Denno of Denno Land Surveying represented the Applicant for approval of re-subdivision of the 5.8-acre property on the east side of Old Farms Road, just south of Holcomb Street; the existing house and barn would remain on 2.3 acres and there would be a 3.5-acre new lot; both lots meet the required R-80 zone frontage and have been approved by FVHD for the existing house reserve area and primary reserve area for the second house. He indicated the new house would be served by a separate driveway, underground utilities with public water, and a septic system; he noted areas of open space and residential use; no new roads are proposed, but there would be some minor clearing along road frontage for utilities and the driveway to go in.
Chairman Rice noted that a re-subdivision is subject to the same conditions in regulations as for a subdivision, and that includes Commission authority to consider open space options. Mr. Denno responded that the Applicant prefers the fee in lieu of, rather than giving open space, and a conservation easement across the back could be provided. Mr. Rabbitt noted a Staff review was provided by Mr. Glidden for Commission review along with a draft motion.
Chairman Rice invited public comment. A member of the public asked what the frontage would be. Mr. Denno showed the plan to the Commission and responded that the existing house is 127 feet from the street and the concept house about 180 feet from the street and they will come in with a real plan for approval before building. The Commissioners discussed open space vs. fee in lieu of. Chairman Rice noted that typically for a large subdivision 20% open space has been required, and per the regulations any open space requirements are at the discretion of the Commission. Commissioners Beum and Leavitt-Smith favored fee in lieu of to allow for accumulating funds to take advantage of developing existing open space, and there is already a lot of open land in the Applicant’s area. Mr. Denno noted the R-80 Zone 80,000 sq. ft. requirement would be met given the acreage for these 2 lots and will not impede on the existing open space, and the Applicant prefers paying the fee in lieu of. Chairman Rice believed per the regulation that the fee in lieu of would be equal to or not more than 10% of the fair market value of the land to be subdivided; and noted the Commission has quickly reached agreement with past applicants. Mr. Rabbitt indicated that it is not always easy to establish value for excess land when you have an existing house on the land, e.g. if the property were valued at $300k and $240K was taken out for the house, the excess acreage would be $60K and 10% of that would be $6K; however, for discussion purposes he did not recommend charging $3K for each lot because one lot already exists and credit given for that lot leaves a $3k fee in lieu of charged for the new lot; 3% of the appraised value is the maximum that can be charged, but the fee in lieu of charged could be less than 3%; various valuation scenarios were discussed by the Commission. Chairman Rice commended the Applicant for coming in with a well-prepared subdivision plan and proposing using fee in lieu of. The Commissioners noted that an appraisal would be difficult and expensive and accepted Staff’s suggested approach as the best approach.
Commissioner Needham made a motion to close the Public Hearing for Application #16-03.
Commissioner Kulakowski seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
2. Applications
a. Application #16-02 19-lot affordable housing subdivision at 80 Climax Road
Chairman Rice noted given the circumstance there would be no discussion.
b. Application #16-03 2-lot re-subdivision at 224 Old Farms Road
Chairman Rice noted Mr. Glidden prepared a proposed draft motion on the back of Exhibit 5 for Commission review to approve Application #16-03 with 5 conditions: 1) All property corners are to be marked prior to filing of mylars; 2) Electronic Auto-CAD drawings of application are to be provided to Town Engineer; 3) Two paper copies of Approved plan and two mylar sets are to be provided to Planning Department staff for signature of Chairman. One set of signed mylars is to be filed with the Simsbury Town Clerk after Chairman signs plan set; 4) No lot to be transferred or sold until copy of signed mylars is filed with the Simsbury Town Clerk; 5) Conditions of approval for Permit CC 15-21 are incorporated into approval. Violations of these conditions will also be considered a violation of the re-subdivision approval; and added 6) A $3000 fee in lieu of open space at the initial transfer of title when the lot is sold – Staff will put that caveat on the Land Records. Commissioner Kulakowski commented that it looked like a pretty clean re-subdivision with no public complaints or issues.
Chairman Rice made a motion to approve Application #16-03 for the re-subdivision by adopting the draft motion for approval prepared by Staff with the addition of Item #6 for a $3,000.00 fee in lieu of open space at the initial transfer of lot conveyance.
Commissioner Beum seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
c. Application #16-04 of LADA, P.C. Land Planners, Agent; Adeline F. Wagner and Richard D. Wagner, Jr., Special Trustees, Owner; for a 7-lot re-subdivision on the property located at 152 Old Farms Road (Assessor’s Map C07, Block 303, Lot 010). Zone R-80. (public hearing to be opened 11/22/2016)
Chairman Rice read Application #16-04 into the record and noted the Public Hearing is scheduled to be opened on 11/22/2016 at 7 p.m. in the Simsbury Town Hall Main Meeting Room. Mr. Rabbitt noted revised plans received 10/25/2016 have been provided to the Commission for review and replace previous plans.
3. Referrals
a. CGS 8-3a Referral to the Zoning Commission on Zoning Application #16-39 of Robert M. Bourke, Esq., Petitioner, for Text Amendments to the Town of Simsbury Zoning Regulations to: Article 7 Section B, to permit farm vineyards and wineries in all residential zones as permitted uses subject to site plan approvals, such facilities would be allowed to hold special events/promotions and sell products at retail (continued from 09/27/2016)
b. CGS 8-3a Referral to the Zoning Commission on Zoning Application #16-40 of Robert M. Bourke, Esq., Petitioner, for Text Amendments to the Town of Simsbury Zoning Regulations to: Article 7 Section B, to permit farm vineyards and wineries in all residential zones as permitted uses subject to site plan approvals, such facilities would be allowed to hold special events/promotions and operate commercial kitchens (continued from 09/27/2016)
Chairman Rice recalled that the Commission discussed at the last meeting Referrals for Applications #16-39 for a farm vineyard and winery and #16-40 for a large acreage farm submitted by Robert M. Bourke, Esq.; and at the last meeting, the Commission requested Town Staff prepare a draft embodying their discussion for Commission review and modification. Mr. Rabbitt clarified Staff attempted to summarize concisely the Commission’s discussion at the last meeting regarding the proposed text amendments in the Commission’s own words. Mr. Rabbitt clarified that while interests associated with Rosedale Farms are proposing the text amendments, the Applications do not indicate a specific property; and if anyone amends regulations, they apply town wide to any other property that meets the standards. Because Rosedale Farms was not identified in the Application, Chairman Rice suggested striking their name in the 1st paragraph and leave it submitted by Mr. Bourke. Commissioner Needham asked if the text amendment would allow them to do more special events than currently. Mr. Rabbit indicated within existing Zoning Regulations there is structure allowing properties to go through a permitting process to hold special events, which is what Rosedale has done on an annual basis; the previous Commission discussion indicated concern with number, scale, and intensity vs. the use itself, and the potential magnitude of those occasions. The Commissioners extensively discussed concerns and regulatory issues in order to determine language reflecting their conclusion regarding the proposed text amendments, as submitted by the Applicant. Commissioner Kulakowski asked if there had been any official discussion with the Land Trust, who are the owners of the development rights for this property; Mr. Rabbitt responded there was no formal correspondence from the Land Trust; and Commissioner Beum’s discussions with the Land Trust indicated they had no problem with this proposal.
Mr. Rabbitt indicated the Zoning Commission would be looking for a response from the Planning Commission by their next meeting on 11/21/2016. Commissioner Kulakowski read the response into the record:
“I am writing in response to the Zoning Commission’s statutory referrals to the Planning Commission regarding 2 applications submitted by Robert M. Bourque, Esq. – Application #16-39 to permit farm vineyards and wineries in all residential zones; and Application #16-40 to permit large acreage agricultural farms to hold special public and private events, sell products at retail and operate large commercial kitchens.
Although the Town’s POCD recommends strategies to help support farms and vineyards and preserve farmlands in order to help retain rural characteristics of the community, one primary feature of the proposed Zoning Regulation text amendments features special events which we feel deviates from the intent of the farm/farmland preservation. With regard to the terms of events, the Planning Commission is most concerned with the possibility that there would be up to 166 events per year at a farm vineyard and winery. In addition, if a particular property is deemed to be both a farm vineyard and a large acreage agricultural farm, it would be possible to have up to 322 events per year as of right. The frequency and intensity of the proposed event activity is not consistent with maintaining the rural characteristic of the community and is not consistent with the traditional activities associated with a farm vineyard and winery or a large acreage rural farm. It is the introduction of this level of non-traditional farming activity that goes beyond the traditional tilling, growing, and husbandry of animals which is of our utmost concern.
We completely understand the concept of value added as it relates to the products produced on the farm, but the commercialization of an agricultural piece of property from a zoning perspective is what we are concerned with the most. Allowing this level of non-traditional farming activity as of right permitted use is concerning.
The Town’s POCD includes strategies associated with the preservation of the Town’s agrarian legacy, encourages the purchase of products, such as milk, wine, and produce from local farms, supports the preservation of Town-owned agricultural land, such as Town Farm Dairy, Dewey Farm, and Hall Farm on Terry’s Plain Road, and continues to promote the farming usage on those lands to keep them in good working condition, maintain fertility, and minimize soil erosion. However, a number of the Town’s larger tracts of land that would fall under the proposed text amendments are primarily classified by the POCD as rural areas.
In the “How We Want to Grow A Future by Design” section of the POCD, typical land use types of rural areas are natural reserved, agriculture, very low density residential as opposed to cluster residential, hamlet, village center, and Town center, which proposed commercial activities. With respect to siting, allowing a commercial kitchen in a residential zone under the umbrella of agriculture that would support a commercial bakery and potentially food service (open to the public on a regular basis), does not fit within the context of the POCD.
Based on the review of the material submitted the Planning Commission concluded that the proposed text amendments, as written, are not consistent with the Town’s 2007 Plan of Conservation and Development.”
Commissioner Needham made a motion finding that the 8-3a Referral to the Zoning Commission calling for a text amendment of Article 7 associated with agricultural uses is not consistent with the Plan of Conservation and Development regarding Applications #16-39 and #16-40, as referenced in their draft response to the Zoning Commission; the draft as edited will be transmitted to the Zoning Commission via the Planning Commission Chair.
Commissioner Kulakowski seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
V. NEW BUSINESS
None.
VI. GENERAL COMMISSION BUSINESS
Mr. Rabbitt confirmed that correspondence received this evening was from Lew Wise regarding Application #16-02.
1. POCD Update
Mr. Rabbitt reminded the Commissioners of the meeting on 11/03/2016 at Henry James Cafeteria from 7-9 p.m. although the exercise can start with an earlier arrival; they are trying to work with SCTV also. He indicated surveys to Department Heads are due on Friday; the random phone survey to 400 residents is being formatted; and a Survey Monkey 2nd digital survey is being prepared. At the end of the Commission’s next meeting, the consultant would like to briefly summarize the results of the 11/03/2016 meeting. Mr. Rabbitt will check with the consultant regarding a Special Meeting and check dates with Commissioners, tentatively 11/7 or 11/14 at 6 p.m. at possibly another location. The Commissioners commented positively on the signs displayed around Town; Staff confirmed they have elicited community response; other methods of notification are planned.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Leavitt-Smith made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m.
Commissioner Beum seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.